English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories
277

Okay, reading other people's questions and answers lately....I decided to do my own research. My question is why have all of you anitcircumcision people lied? I just spent a good 3 hours trolling the APP.org website and there are TONS of studies showing the health benefits. It DOES reduce the risk of STD's, UTI, and infections by 54%! Also, it poses less risk to spread infections to women by over 70% of the time when no condom is used. Not to mention all the hype of women prefering the look of it. I really started digging into it when my friend mentioned children getting tormented in school gym classes for not being circumcisied and all the people's completely outlandish reports on here. My doctor had already recommended it, but I wanted to check things out myself. I am glad I did, it has only made us 200% percent sure that circumcision is the right thing to do. Plus, research is putting aside all that's said in th Bible. It does say that God's men are to be circumcisied!!

2006-11-09 07:00:26 · 15 answers · asked by angie_laffin927 4 in Pregnancy & Parenting Newborn & Baby

Oh, the reason you people are misreading the APP's recommendations is because it says it shows NO BENEFITS to the child's IMMEDIATE health. Meaning the baby, while you care caring for him would be fine. What about considering the future? Know how many been past the age of 18 went in last year to have it done? Over 500,00! Their mother's made mistakes and they couldn't live with it anymore! It is so much MORE painful and risky to be done after infancy.

2006-11-09 07:08:03 · update #1

Yeah....a skin graph is needed! Ya know, a routine skin graph that is done thousands of times! That is the ONLY accident (which is snipping too much foreskin) that was reported in the United States. That still only happen 1.2% of the time! More babies die during delivery than accidents happen to boys being circumcisied.

2006-11-09 07:10:25 · update #2

Actually for you idiots that don't know what the APP is it's the American Acedemy of Pediatric....it isn't pro or anti it's studies the research of thousand's of tests and studies and gives the best information. DUH it's where doctor's get information from! I wish people had brains! FYI awesome job mom's who chose their child's health! And ya know, yeah I am attacking bad parents who didn't have it done because there are plenty of them attacking the ones who believe in it.

2006-11-09 07:28:14 · update #3

15 answers

Oh we are liars are we?

Let us look at the fine tradition of the pro-circ forces in this country. Starting with Kellogg (yes the founder of the cereal company) and his friends the pediatricians of the day.
Quotes from the medical journals of that day:

"In cases of masturbation we must, I believe, break the habit by inducing such a condition of the parts as will cause too much local suffering to allow of the practice being continued. For this purpose, if the prepuce is long, we may circumcise the male patient with present and probably with future advantage; the operation, too, should not be performed under chloroform, so that the pain experienced may be associated with the habit we wish to eradicate."
Athol A. W. Johnson, On An Injurious Habit Occasionally Met with in Infancy and Early Childhood, The Lancet, vol. 1 (7 April 1860)

"There can be no doubt of [masturbation's] injurious effect, and of the proneness to practice it on the part of children with defective brains. Circumcision should always be practiced. It may be necessary to make the genitals so sore by blistering fluids that pain results from attempts to rub the parts."
Angel Money, Treatment of Disease in Children. Philadelphia: P. Blakiston. 1887, p. 421.

You are judged by the company you keep; your fellow reptiles would speak well of you!

These were DOCTORS THAT TREATED CHILDREN! It was sick brains like this that introduced this country to circumcision. Of course as time went on this rational fell out of favor with the public so other reasons for continuing the mutilation for money had to be invented. All of a sudden it became impossible to clean an uncircumcised penis so the story of circumcision for hygiene came about. Then it was venereal disease, then it was cancer, then it was HIV AIDS, then it was ???, and the it was ????. All just one more load of crap after another!

"That is the ONLY accident (which is snipping too much foreskin) that was reported in the United States. That still only happen 1.2% of the time! More babies die during delivery than accidents happen to boys being circumcisied" Birth is a necessary part of life and things do go wrong and babies die; circumcision is an unnecessary elective surgery and things go wrong and babies do die from this too. SEE THE DIFFERENCE! Too much skin removed ONLY 1.2% of the time, that is a higher incidence than the rate of the dreaded UTI among the uncircumcised male. The UTI the one out of one hundred uncircumcised boys get is easily treated with antibiotics just like it is for the 9 out of one hundred girls. The problem of too much skin being removed is not so easily remedied; skin graft? yea right, the penis is a great place to have skin with limited nerve function. This shows how much you know (or care) about your son’s penis. To you it is just a waterspout that is supposed to look like a plastic dildo.

Complications occur at a rate of about one out of ten circumcisions, while most are said to be minor, some result in serious disfigurement or loss of function or even the total loss of the penis or life of the child. (CAN YOU IMAGINE DEALING WITH ANY OF THESE RESULTS OF AN UNNECESSARY ELECTIVE SURGERY?) These things happen in even major hospitals in this country!

The American Academy of Pediatrics has called the evidence "complex and conflicting, " and therefore concludes that, at present, the evidence is insufficient to support routine neonatal circumcision. "Oh, the reason you people are misreading the APP's recommendations is because it says it shows NO BENEFITS to the child's IMMEDIATE health. Meaning the baby, while you care caring for him would be fine. What about considering the future?" If you are treating people for diseases they MIGHT have in the future, consider this, the incidence of breast cancer is one out of eight women which is thousands of times higher risk than any problems which might require circumcision (even in the US which has an abnormally high rate of "medically required" circumcisions). Would you remove your own breasts and ovaries after menopause because it reduces the risk of cancer?

How about these facts?
Of the industrialized nations the US circumcises the highest percentage of baby boys.
Of the industrialized nations the US has the highest infant death rate. (Is this a coincidence?)
Of the industrialized nations the US has the highest incidence of HIV AIDs.
Of the industrialized nations the US has the highest gonorrhea rate. Roughly 50 times that of Sweden (non-circumcising) and eight times that of Canada (less circumcising)

The CDC says 15 million people in the United States become infected every year with an STD, ***half of which are INCURABLE viral infections such as herpes or human papilloma virus (HPV), the CAUSE of genital warts and cervical cancer****.

Such ***incurable* ** STD's affect 65 million Americans.

It says 5.5 million Americans are infected with HPV every year; 3 million get chlamydia, 1 million get herpes and 650,000 get gonorrhea.

The United States looks bad when compared to other rich countries. The dominance of circumcision among the currently sexually active population has done nothing to stop or even slow the spread of these diseases! If anything the reluctance of circumcised males to use condoms (they already have very low sensitivity) has contributed to the spread.

It is time to enter the 21st century and quit modifying people to match the tastes of others (male genital mutilation or female genital mutilation).

Teaching your sons about hygiene will open a channel of communications with them. This openness has been missing from family lives. You don't need to talk about these things when they seem to take care of them selves; so your sons get used to not talking about things sexual with their parents. Teach them about hygiene and it will be easier to teach them about safe sex.

The money that is spent on circumcisions would be better spent on condoms.

And why do you attempt to quote the Bible? If religion was really important to you, you would know the truth. Here it is the letter of Saint Paul to the Galatians 5:1-12
“It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm and do not let yourselves be burdened again by the yoke of slavery.
Mark my words! I, Paul tell you that if you let yourself be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all. Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law. You who are trying to be justified by law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace. But by faith we eagerly await through the Spirit the righteousness for which we hope. FOR IN CHRIST JESUS NEITHER CIRCUMCISION NOR UNCIRCUMCISION HAS ANY VALUE. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.
You were running a good race. Who cut in on you and kept you from obeying the truth? That kind of persuasion does not come from the one who calls you. "A little yeast works through the whole batch of dough." I am confident in the Lord that you will take no other view. The one who is throwing you into confusion will pay the penalty, whoever he may be. Brothers, if I am still preaching circumcision, why am I still being persecuted? In that case the offense of the cross has been abolished. As for those agitators, I wish they would go the whole way and emasculate themselves!”

I really like that last part where it says that those that preach circumcision should emasculate (castrate) themselves. So if you really believe in circumcision, you should castrate yourself and then get back to us.

2006-11-12 06:58:53 · answer #1 · answered by cut50yearsago 6 · 41 14

I agree with you completely! Either make them both legal, or both illegal. It would be very interesting in seeing how something like that were to go through the court system. I don't have an issue with adult males being circumcised at their own will; we pierce, tattoo, pickle our bodies all the time- why should this be different? As long as my premiums for universal healthcare don't pay for it, I couldn't care less. It's with infants i have a problem with. It's his damn body! The "looks better", "matches the father", "easier to clean" "safer from STDs" is all crap: Looks better: Like you said, that's subject to opinion. Matches the father: OH GREAT! The father was beaten with a belt as a child too! Wanna have your son re-live THAT pain too? Easier to clean: Bugger off. Get off you lazy a$$ and clean your kid! And teach him good hygiene when he's old enough. It wasn't hard for me to grasp. Safer: If there is apparently no undisputed scientific fact out there that proves I didn't choose to be gay, I refuse to believe that there's undisputed scientific proof that says that cut men are more resilient to STDs. Now on to religion: My best friend is jewish and is quite proud of his cut penis. In fact it's sometimes part of his opening line when he meet's someone new. My friend has always been sensitive about his religion (even though he's reform and basically non-practicing) to the point where if you don't agree with any certain part of his religion, he gets defensive. I used to say that it was fine to do it for religious reasons, but then I thought... wait. There are other religions and cultures that require female circumcisions- those cultures exist here in Canada and the US, yet FGM is illegal. So what's with the double standard? Don't compare the severity; they're both barbaric unnecessary operations- WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE? The same friend's girlfriend plans on having her kids cut. Why? "It's cleaner. Oh he won't remember it." This girl is a HUGE hypocrite. Why? She's pro-life to the highest degree- to almost the level of Palin's pro-life stance. Ok.. Child's rights, bla bla bla... Now what about when the child is born? Where are his rights then? With all due respect to everyone who practices a faith of some kind, I say to hell with religious, traditional, or cultural reasons. Outlaw infant circumcision for BOTH genders or make both legal.

2016-05-22 00:57:05 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Biblically when one speaks of circumcision in the New Testament one is referring to circumcision of the heart. The Old Testament does refer to physical circumcision but we live by the New. I think one big element to this circumcision thing is cleanliness. As long a s a person washes every day then that is sufficient. However one thing that has been passed on to me is the fact that the uncircumcised person has a more sensitive area and this creates more sexual enjoyment so as far as I knwo this is the only benefit. In any event personal hygiene is what it is all about. By the way many wome dont care about being uncircumcised a s to circumcised. I ahev found women more favorable to sizeable units than smaller ones and this is my single most important find

2006-11-09 07:16:34 · answer #3 · answered by likeskansas 5 · 15 7

There are benefits, but to me they are too miniscule to subject a 2-day-old infant to surgery over. Female circumcision would be great at reducing UTIs, too (which girls get way more than uncirced guys) but we consider it cruel. I think it's cruel to amputate part of a baby's healthy penis. Most of the benefits of circumcision can also be had in an intact male with hygiene and having sex in responsible ways.

If you are Christian, then perhaps you should look for info about circ in the New Testament. Once Christ came it is no longer necessary to circumcise. If you do believe it's for a covenant with God, I hope you do it in practice like is mentioned in the Old Testament (as a ceremony on the eighth day, not in the hospital on the third day). It may also interest you to know that circumcision as practiced in the Old Testament was only cutting off the tip of the foreskin- not the whole thing.

2006-11-09 09:21:19 · answer #4 · answered by AerynneC 4 · 32 8

I would say no to it. bcos
I know the difference of feeling without being circumcised and being circumcised. You simply just loose a lot of sensation and its nor worth it. as far as STI are concerned simply use a condom, have safe sex. Prevention is always better than cure.

According to me its a human rights voilation... my rights were voilated too.

All research says its uncecessary. please note that all research comming out of africa and india that circumcision can prevent aids is a fake propaganda going around. I have done my part of research too and in my case its a research which i started in 1998 till date.
I reserve one months salary towards this cause.
As far as infections are concerned they can simply be prevented.
for more information on this go to "noharm" website.

In any case its a form of genital mutilation GM let it be for male GM or female (FGM).

Simply like democracy no one has the right to take a decision on your behalf.

Still this is a debatable question.

2006-11-11 09:01:10 · answer #5 · answered by mohnkhan 3 · 35 9

you can twist studies any way you want to make you feel better for your decisions. I don't cut off body parts because the bible tells me to. I don't listen to the aap because they lie about other things *cough vaccinations*. A way to prevent std's is WEAR A FREAKING CONDOM! My husband is intact and has never had an infection and neither have I because we are monogamous and clean.

2006-11-09 10:24:44 · answer #6 · answered by me 4 · 32 10

Haha, I can't imagine having to teach my child to wipe his feces covered booty.

2006-11-09 07:37:35 · answer #7 · answered by eaglesnest1119 2 · 17 5

There are many studies that prove just the opposite.
Have you considered that maybe the APP.org is the one that is lying to make money?!!!!
If you want to do it them go right ahead.






The “medical” reasons for circumcision are for Doctors to make MONEY!!!
Circumcision is “nothing” compared to other much more terrible things that people do for MONEY, when MONEY is involved EVERYRHING is possible, MONEY is the priority not moral values, not ethics, not health, not wrong or right, not even human life, etc. People are selfish by nature. And that is soooo sad. $$$CASH$$$

Simply does not matter if circumcision has advantages or not; he has the right to his body to be intact, and that overrides everything else. And btw it only has disadvantages, see below.

MOTHERS, the feelings of mothers who observed the circumcision of their babies. Go here if you have the courage:
http://www.circumcision.org/mothers.htm
They do not remember the pain when they grow up, but I wonder what kind of neurological/emotional damage it does to inflict such severe pain to such a young one!

In the US circumcision started to stop boys from masturbating; they will take much longer to reach the orgasm, and the orgasm will not be as intense, but that will not stop them.
Nowadays the “medical” reasons to circumcision are for Doctors to make MONEY!!!

RELIGION--If God intended boys to not have "skin" He would have made them so.
Also, if you examine the bible, lest just say that is full of terrible things that are considered very illegal nowadays, and many of those terrible things are AGAINST WOMEN. Women, how would you like it if those things get legalized?
http://www.nocirc.org/religion/

HYGIENE--Use a new invention, soap and water!!! Women produce much more “smegma”, all kinds of discharges, wetness, and smells; because of physiologic and anatomical reasons, and how would you feel if they cut your vulva lips??? Women, why don’t you answer my question, are you afraid? Women are more likely to get urinary tract infections and no one suggests we surgically alter them at birth to reduce the risks! Just one of many double standards and laws that always treat men worse.

MEDICAL REASONS--No medical reasons. It is not a birth defect! A extremely small chance of a complication do not justify the removal of the foreskin, if so, why don't we remove the tonsils and the appendix when a child is born, and the chance of complications of the tonsils and the appendix is much greater. And what is even greater is the chance of breast cancer so the best thing to do is to remove the breast glands of young girls or at least remove them at the first sign of trouble without trying any alternative treatments first in order to preserve the breast(women, how do you like it now?). And for infections of all the organs, including female organs, use a new invention called antibiotics. Talking about complications, in fact many baby boys die each year from circumcision and related complications.
EVEN if “TRUE phimosis” occurs, instead of chopping it off like barbarians!, use Conservative Treatments like:
-Topical Medication(non-traumatic and non-destructive)
-Dilation and Stretching(non-traumatic and non-destructive)
-Combination treatment(non-traumatic and non-destructive)
-Preputioplasty is the medical term for plastic surgery of the prepuce or foreskin(many methods).
If you want more detail on Conservative Treatments, go here:
http://www.cirp.org/library/treatment/phimosis/
http://www.circinfo.org/alternatives.html
The foreskin can still be tight even after puberty, and it is natural, not TRUE phimosis.
And now they invented a new reason to make money, the risk of STD in uncircumcised men. Well actually uncircumcised men have more protection, but in practical terms that protection means nothing, because circumcised or not, if you have sex without protection and your partner have an STD you will be infected FOR SURE! That means, it is just one more stupid and desperate reason in order to make money with circumcisions.

SEX--Foreskin actually enhances the sexual experience for men because it constantly moves over the head of the penis causing more friction and pleasure. Men will also lose much sensitivity to the glans if circumcised.
Circumcised men will have to deal with discomfort and dry glans. Uncircumcised men, pull the foreskin back for a day, and see how it feels against your underwear all day, and see what happens. The frenulum is the G SPOT in men.
The foreskin have those functions: protective, erogenous, sensory, and sexual physiologic. After all, why would you want to lose all of those “Meissner corpuscles”, the same nerve complexes which provide fine touch to the fingertips?
It is there for many reasons, that is how a man should be(it is natural).
If women like it better circumcised because it looks better(strange, not natural) or gives them more sexual pleasure(strange, not natural), then too bad, they do not have the right! All men do not like mutilated vulvas, and all men like breasts with nipples, they do not like mutilated breasts, etc, etc, etc, because that is the way those organs are supposed to be, it is natural. Interesting, isn’t?!!!

If that was a common practice to do that to baby girls, all the women would be in a BIG UPROAR about it(and men too!, men are not like women), but it’s ok to mutilate little boys. The great majority of the ones that agree with circumcision are women for their stupid selfish reasons. Even court cases reported in which mother and father fight because the mother wants to mutilate the son, it is always the mother!. You women should be ashamed to that to your son. Men that are not circumcised, will not get circumcised when adults, they would scream, kick, fight and run, if someone tries to mutilate their privates area, just like you women would run too if someone tried to do that to your labia. Men that where circumcised do not realize what they lost because never had one, and most of them that do realize try to justify it so they do not feel bad about it. Many circumcised men feel very bad emotionally because of what was done to them to such a private area.
The uncut boys don’t joke the cut ones. The cut ones joke because they are jealous and traumatized, it makes them feel better, minimize the emotional pain.
It is mutilation of defenceless children in the most private spot, genital mutilation.
It is cruel and barbaric.
It is a human rights violation.
It is not the parent’s decision; it is the parent’s decision if they want to abuse him, rape him, or to kill him? It is the parent’s decision to choose the son religion? How can he chose a religion or his believes, if he is just a baby?
I do not even agree that it is ok if an adult man wants to get circumcised. I think it is wrong, because if a man wants to lose a finger, the Doctor can not do that to him. Think about it, think, think. And by the way, adult men that decide to get circumcised, do it because they know most women like it, they just do it to be more accepted by women.
I think it is just like slavery and all other barbaric acts of the past, it was accepted because it was common practice or tradition, everyone accepted slavery without questioning the facts, but it is not accepted anymore in a modern and fair and civilized society. Circumcision must not be allowed, BY LAW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Many other reasons not to do it, check it out:
http://www.mothersagainstcirc.org/
http://www.cirp.org/library/treatment/phimosis/
http://www.noharmm.org/
http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/
http://www.circumcisionquotes.com/boydies.html

2006-11-09 20:11:20 · answer #8 · answered by miniboi6666 2 · 36 10

OK I'm atheist...I don't believe in HACKING off peoples parts..so if for NO other reason than that it's a POOR idea. When your son becomes an adult he will be quite capable of deciding the fate of his foreskin himself.

2006-11-09 07:12:03 · answer #9 · answered by Thankyou4givengmeaheadache 5 · 39 13

in your research did you also come across what could happen if an accident occurs

2006-11-09 07:07:48 · answer #10 · answered by Greeneyed 7 · 30 9

fedest.com, questions and answers